#now the entire family unit is considered legal

[waitmyturtles]

(Source) (Source)

[makingqueerhistory]

I feel reasonably certain you're the one to ask, but if not, i hope you can point me in the right direction.

A while back, you put up a quote from someone about realising their queer identity being akin to wanting to quietly change train carriages. That particular idea has stuck with me, and I wanted to find the exact quote so I could remember it properly. Do you know who it was that said it, and in what context?

I know exactly what you are talking about! The quote you're thinking of is:

"I confess that I am one of those passengers that Fate put in the wrong train. Should I have caused an alarm? I chose the second, quieter way: I applied for a rewrite of the ticket.”

Which was said by Zdeněk Koubek, who was an olympic athlete!

Here is a snippet from our article about him:

"Koubek was born December 8, 1913, in Paskov, Czechia (Now the Czech Republic). Growing up with eight siblings in a poor Catholic household, he was an active child and very fond of athletics. His family moved to Brno while Koubek was still a child, and there he became interested in track and field. With very little formal training, he managed to reach peak performance. He had a decent education and considered becoming a clerk, but chose to dedicate himself to sports. Due to his outstanding performance at 17, he moved to Prague and joined the Prague University team, also working part-time as an instructor and coach. In 1932, at the age of 19, he broke his first national record and shortly after set five more. He won two medals in the Women’s World Games in London in 1934 and set two world records. It was at this point, due to his excellent performance and his gender-non-conforming nature, that rumours started circulating. Newspapers pointed out his “masculine” behaviours. Following this, there was an anonymous request for Koubek to be examined by Olympic-sanctioned doctors to ensure he was not lying about his gender. As this happened, Koubek left competitive sports entirely. Around the same time, writer Lída Merlínová wrote a biography about Zdeněk Koubek titled Zdenin světový rekord // Zdena’s world record. Merlínová was known for her writing on queer people, publishing the first Czech book about lesbians. In Zdenin světový rekord, Koubek is written as various degrees of gender non-conforming, androgynous, and masculine, and this book also added to the controversy of Zdenek’s sportsmanship. After disappearing from sports for some time, Koubek resurfaced with The World Record Woman. Published in Prague Illustrated Newsletter, Koubek himself wrote the 20-part biographical series. In it, he spoke of how doctors had mistakenly assigned him female at birth and how this had affected his life for over two decades. He once again disappeared, this time journeying to the United States of America for six months. He held lectures and told his life story. Upon his return to Prague in 1936, he underwent gender affirmation surgery and changed his legal name. He lived the rest of his life in Prague with his wife, later joined his brother’s rugby team, and never returned to the world of competitive sports. He passed away at the age of 73."

Zdeněk Koubek

[genderqueerdykes]

now that we are no longer actively in the situation, we're going to write about our experience with homelessness in a new zine. we just wanted to point some things out before we release the zine, because a lot of people get confused about the definition of the state of "homelessness": most people are stuck in a rigid binary of "has a literal roof over their head" and "doesn't have a literal roof over their head."

this is a legally inaccurate definition of homelessness in the United States (where I was homeless). the legal definition of homeless in the United states is very long, as listed by the federal government on this webpage here. but i wanted to give you the most succinct, easy to digest part of this:

i have experienced a few types of homelessness recently. couch surfing is considered a form of homelessness. living in a hotel with no permanent residence is homelessness. being forced to move from place to place is homelessness. unless your housing is permanent and stable, and you are on the lease, mortgage, or own a property, you are very likely in a situation where you are considered homeless. there are many of us who dont have family to lean on, or any type of support network that could help us get a leg up. many of us haven't had those our entire lives

it's very easy to get kicked out of a lot of these situations because you are legally not on a lease or any kind of written, legal contract. friends and family can decide to ask to you leave when and where ever, and have the right to do so, because they may run the risk of eviction by allowing you to stay with them. hotels are under no obligation to let you stay for as long as you need- a lot of the time they have strict check-in and check-out times, and require folks to make their payments by a specific time, or check in at a certain time, which lead to them being put on "do not rent" status if they don't make it in time. other problems arise, like pets not being allowed in many hotels. i had to have a friend take care of my pet rat while i was homeless in a motel last year because i did not want to risk being kicked out of the cheapest motel that wasn't disgusting in the city

it's not a rigid binary. there are a lot of experiences when it comes to matters of shelter and survival. please be kinder to homeless folk. a lot more people go through this than you realize. if your coworker tells you she sleeps in her car at night, she means it and she's homeless. if your best friend tells you they sleep at work, they mean it, they're homeless. if your friend tells you they take naps on public transit to get their sleep, they mean it, they're homeless. if your friend is constantly bouncing from couch to couch to couch, they're homeless. if your uncle says he's been sleeping in a motel, he's homeless. the list goes on.

be kinder to folks struggling with housing- they're going through enough as is. support all homeless folks

[noctivagantpodcast]

I Live On Stolen Land

Consider donating to one of these wonderful charities dedicated to preserving the cultures, livelihoods, rights, and dignity of Indigenous peoples.

First Nations Development Institute. Information taken from their 'Our Programs' page: Grantmaker dedicated to addressing financial inequality and its many, many negative impacts. In additional to financial aid, FNDI provides job training and participates in policy-making and advocacy, often focusing on environmental concerns, food insecurity, and tribal sovereignty. Some examples of current projects include "Fortifying Our Forests" AKA restoring and protecting sacred land in partnership with the Forest Service, Native Language Immersion Initiative AKA ensuring the survival of Native languages, and Native Farm To School AKA connecting Native youth with traditional means of growing and harvesting food.

Native American Rights Fund A registered non-profit that provides legal representation in matters of Native interest, be that a single individual or an entire tribe. Since their inception, they have won cases that made critical contributions to the advancement of Native rights in the United States. Their efforts have helped uphold tribal sovereignty, compelled museums, universities, and other institutions to return the remains of Native ancestors, and protected the voting rights of pretty much everyone.

Redhawk Native American Arts Council This organization's primary focus is on the preservation of Native American arts through educational programs. We can also thank them for granting scholarships to Native students seeking higher education, and for running a youth program which aims to help Urban Indigenous youth connect with their heritage through the arts.

Seventh Generation Fund A "fiscal sponsor" for smaller community groups that are run by and for Native tribes/individuals, with the focus of preserving heritage and defending tribal sovereignty, as well as continued survival post-genocide. One example of their work is the Flicker Fund, a disaster fund dedicated to supporting Indigenous communities during times of crisis, be that a pandemic, extreme weather, or a severe drought. Another is the Traditions Bearers Fellowship, which provides financial support to tribal community members who carry on pre-colonization traditions.

Quiluete Move To Higher Ground Stephanie Meyer committed a serious of egregious acts of cultural appropriation and exploitation, and made a very large fortune off a very real tribe. This very real tribe now finds themselves living in a tsunami zone and unable to afford a move to a safer area. As of 2022, the move of the Tribal School, the most important phase, is complete, but there's much more work to be done.

Indigenous Women Rising Abortion Fund A fund to provide Native individuals and family access to abortion care, menstrual hygiene supplies, and midwifery. Here are two separate articles verifying their status as the ONLY indigenous specific (and Indigenous led) abortion fund. For more information on how the destruction of Roe V Wade has negatively impacted Indigenous women, look here and here.

South Dakota Historical Society Foundation So, this isn't a Native led or Native specific organization, but, they work closely with Indigenous communities in South Dakota to preserve their heritage alongside the state's history. I recently had a lovely conversation with one of their representatives about the Ghost Shirt their society is sheltering until such a time as the tribe it rightfully belongs to can house it safely. Article about the shirt's repatriation with some cool info on the shirt's history is here.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Amee Vanderpool at SHERO:

On Friday, Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry signed a bill into law that classifies the two most common abortion-inducing drugs — mifepristone and misoprostol — as controlled and dangerous substances, and that legislation goes into effect today. These two medications make up the most common method for abortion in the United States and now, women in Louisiana will have a difficult time gaining access to both. While the law in Louisiana previously required a prescription for both drugs, and made it a crime to use them to induce an abortion, this new law will make it even harder for doctors to treat patients in the state with the medication, as the pills will be harder to obtain. Unlike these two medications, the other drugs that are listed as Schedule IV controlled and dangerous drugs in the State of Louisiana were listed as such to reflect a designation typically reserved for drugs that carry a risk of abuse or dependence, like opioids and benzodiazepines. Just months after Roe v. Wade was overturned, the State of Louisiana enacted a near total abortion ban, making it illegal to obtain an abortion in most circumstances and criminalizing doctors who provide the service. Due to these restrictions, many people in the state have been forced to obtain these medications through the mail. In a #WeCount survey in May of 2024, done by The Society of Family Planning abortion activist group, it was revealed that roughly 8,000 women a month in predominantly abortion ban states were getting mifepristone and misoprostol by mail at the end of 2023. [...]

This new law also helps to set the stage for an inevitable lawsuit by the State of Louisiana, against doctors who are prescribing the medications from other states with legal shield law protections in place. As Conservative states were enacting bans on abortion access, several Democratic-controlled states — like Colorado, Massachusetts, New York, Vermont and Washington — enacted shield laws meant to protect providers from prosecution in other states. These laws denote that the only state with jurisdiction to prosecute doctors who prescribe by mail are the states in which the doctor is physically located. [...] This is yet another case that will ultimately make it through the appeal courts and all the way up to the United States Supreme Court. This medication restriction in Louisiana is ultimately the catalyst for an attempt to restrict the medication across the entire United States, and considering the current Conservative Majority on the highest court in the land, it might just work.

Louisiana’s disgraceful mifepristone and misoprostol ban bill SB276 is pure government overreach by anti-abortion reactionaries.

[dwarf-vader-of-middle-earth]

My father ain't getting his Christmas present today. Everyone in the house will get presents, multiple. But he won't get a damn thing from me now or probably ever again for that matter. He doesn't even love me. Why should I spend anything on him?

When my brothers and I went to go get my wheelchair I bought, my father pulled me aside and didn't even look at me as he said, "You can become magically able bodied if you just exercise and lose some weight. If you buy that thing, it has to go into storage and you have to pay for storage. You're making a big mistake." I told him then and there I don't appreciate him and he does nothing for me. Then I left.

On our way home, my father tried to physically blockade my brothers from pulling into the driveway, and said we have to take the wheelchair directly to storage. We... don't have a storage unit anywhere, and it's New Year's Eve, so none are open. Additionally, we have a double garage which you can park 2 vans inside of. We've done it before. And here was father, yelling at us that we can't fit a wheelchair inside...

A few months ago, my father tried to obtain legally confidential information from my therapist which I legally signed documents to make sure he could never get. And he sent lawyers after her and her staff, angry phone calls, and it got to the point the staff texted me and asked for assistance. Twice.

What's more is, I've gotten dozens of blood tests from half a dozen different doctors over the years. All of them confirmed I have high numbers for lupus and arthritis. There's no denying it. And yet, my father said they're wrong. My doctors are wrong, my therapist is wrong, and science is wrong. There is nothing wrong with me. He asked me, "How did you get around Universal Studios?" I told him I limped and complained about my leg pain the entire time. He said, "I don't remember that." But considering he gaslights me on a daily basis, I can promise he remembers and is lying.

And then, I remembered something else. My father has a cousin who was born with a deformed spine. She cannot walk, never has been able to, and yet, whenever my family visits her or she visits us, my father will make offhand comments when she's not looking or isn't in earshot, that she doesn't need to be in a wheelchair and she could walk if she just tried hard enough and that it would straighten out her spine if she did. She... has a shifted spinal column that's missing discs. I uhh... I don't see how you can fix that by walking.

Anyway, yeah. I'm not going to give anything to my father today, tomorrow, next year, ever. He takes my money each month just to turn off my electronic contact with the outside world whenever he's angry (he disables my phone, wifi, TV, data, etc. on all devices). You know, I learned to hack so I could hack his account to gain that access back. He somehow found out, and set up 2FA which I don't know how to get around (my guess is he was tracking when the account was logged into, from which IP, and checking the trace logs).

There's a reason I send all my messages to friends through encrypted apps, or untracked accounts, and hide all my social media posts from my father. I've learned the sounds of everyone's footsteps in the house, so I know when to be silent if my father comes around. I know to lock my door if he does. I fear him and everything he says. Nobody should have to live this way. But I do.

And sometimes, I ask myself if it's worth it to live at all when these are the conditions I'm forced into.

Here's to 2024. Maybe, somehow, it'll lead me to freedom...

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Winkfield Twyman Jr.

Published: Dec 27, 2023

I have a tender spot in my heart for race pioneers. My spirits were lifted when L. Douglas Wilder was sworn in as the first Black American governor of a U.S. state—the state of Virginia, of which I am a native son. My mom was dying of cancer at the time, but she wanted me to witness Black History in the making. So on that cold January day in 1990, I left her bedside and bore witness to the coming of a better time in Virginia.

Similarly, on the night of November 4, 2008, when Barack Obama was elected the first Black President of the United States of America, I joined family and friends to run into the darkness of the San Diego night, yelling and screaming, whooping and hollering. It was a sacred moment in our American history to be always cherished and never forgotten. That the American electorate would elect a Black person to the highest office in the land was something our grandparents and our grandparents' grandparents could only dream of.

I considered the project of race in America to be finished that November night in San Diego. The election of a Black U.S. president broke the psychological barrier in our minds. There is no higher office than President of the United States of America—in the entire world. For me, the questions of race were all answered. I was done with race.

But too many Americans can't seem to quit race. Fifteen years after President Barack Obama's triumph, some feel it noteworthy to remark that Claudine Gay is the first Black President of Harvard University. Worse, in the face of numerous mounting scandals, many are defending Gay by claiming that the attacks against her are racial in nature.

They are not. They are all well deserved.

The demand that Gay resign stems from the utter lack of moral competency she displayed in her testimony before Congress, in which she said that calling for the genocide of Jews is only against Harvard rules in certain contexts. She also failed to condemn the Hamas atrocities against Israel in real time on October 7, another reason she should resign. There is also now evidence of serial plagiarism. And did I mention Gay has published no books—an unprecedented feat for a Harvard President, unless one travels back in time to the year 1773?

And yet, many are coming to her defense. Having finally got their wish of a Black president of Harvard, Harvard seems unwilling to let her go. The racial wagons have circled around Gay, with President of the NAACP alleging that White Supremacy is afoot and Morehouse President David Thomas claiming in a Forbes interview that Gay is a scholar at the "top of her profession... as qualified as any President Harvard has ever had."

This is not only misguided, but deeply ironic. Did you know that Claudine Gay during her Harvard career has repeatedly targeted and disrupted the careers of prominent Black male professors?

As Dean of the College, Gay terminated Ronald S. Sullivan, Jr. as Faculty Dean of the Winthrop House. Professor Sullivan, Jr., a graduate of Morehouse College and Harvard Law School, was the first Black faculty dean of a house in the history of Harvard College.

What was Professor Sullivan's offense? Sullivan deigned to represent the disgraced movie producer Harvey Weinstein—an act of moral conscience, since all are entitled to legal representation in our legal system. Yet legal conscience mattered not to Claudine Gay, who terminated a race pioneer for doing his civic duty.

You may excuse this heartless termination as a one-off. You would be wrong. Economics Professor Roland G. Fryer, Jr. was next in the sights of Dean Gay. Fryer was a top Black professor at Harvard. After having overcome all sorts of hardship and childhood deprivation, Professor Fryer joined the faculty at Harvard to become the second-youngest professor ever to be awarded tenure at Harvard, and went on to blaze a trail of distinction, including winning the MacArthur Fellowship and the John Bates Clark Medal.

Yet when Fryer undertook research into the killings of unarmed Black men in Houston, Fryer's research found no racial disparities. He made the mistake of undercutting the racial narrative that the Left has adopted, and as a result, Gay did her best to remove all of his academic privileges, coordinating a witch hunt against him. Fryer survived Gay's crusade of discharge but Fryer's lab was shut down, his reputation tarnished.

No one in good faith should defend President Gay because she is the first Black president of Harvard. Even if you don't agree with me that our racial struggle is in our past, someone who has targeted Black male professors has waived any benefit of the "first Black" defense.

W. F. Twyman, Jr., Class of 1986 Harvard Law School, is a former law professor. He is also co-author of Letters in Black and White: A New Correspondence on Race in America published by Pitchstone Publishing.

==

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Claudine Gay is as corrupt as they come.

[tomorrowusa]

The conviction of Hunter Biden has ironically undercut one of Donald Trump's main (and false) narratives. It's now more difficult for Trump to claim that Joe Biden controls the entire justice system in the US and somehow masterminded the conviction of Trump on all 34 felony counts in the Stormy Daniels hush money trial.

The survival of the rule of law in America and untainted justice may depend on the choice voters make in November. The country’s divergent possible paths under President Joe Biden or presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump were highlighted in the way both men, their families and their political operations reacted to the twin trials and verdicts. Biden made no effort to interfere in the prosecution of his son Hunter with either his executive authority or with the media megaphone of his office. He allowed his own Justice Department to secure a guilty verdict Tuesday that could result in jail time for the recovering addict and hurt his own 2024 campaign. “I will accept the outcome of this case and will continue to respect the judicial process as Hunter considers an appeal,” the president said after the jury found his son guilty oflying on a federal background check form and possessing a gun while addicted to, or using, illegal drugs. He has already said he won’t pardon his son. In his first reaction to the verdict, Hunter Biden didn’t attack the judge or prosecutors, simply saying he was grateful for the love and support of his family and blessed to be clean again. The Bidens’ comportment contrasted with Trump’s reaction to his own trial and conviction nearly two weeks ago in his hush money case. The ex-president lashed out at witnesses, prosecutors, jurors and the judge. He claimed that “this was done by (the) Biden administration in order to wound or hurt a political opponent.” He blasted “a rigged decision,” despite the fact the Justice Department was not involved in the case brought by the Manhattan district attorney. Since then, Trump has been warning he’d use presidential powers to punish his political opponents and bend the legal system to his will. “Sometimes revenge can be justified,” Trump told TV psychologist Phil McGraw last week. “I have to be honest. You know, sometimes it can.” The former president told Fox News last week, “I would have every right to go after them,” referring to the Bidens. Throughout his trial in Manhattan, his former hometown, Trump, insisted he couldn’t get a fair verdict in a city that votes mostly Democratic. But Delaware is a blue state — and a jury there just convicted the president’s son. One juror told CNN Tuesday that politics never came up in the deliberations. Jurors in Trump’s trial have yet to speak, perhaps because of fears they could be identified following the ex-president’s intimidation tactics.

If you want the justice system to still exist in the United States after the election, vote for Biden. If you prefer an incoherent dictator using the courts to get "revenge" and "retribution" from perceived opponents, then vote for Trump or some useless turd party candidate with no chance of winning (same thing).

[ahaura]

In regards to one of your recent posts about freeing Palestine, may I offer the following information:

-The Peel Commission investigated a one-state solution and came to the conclusion it is not feasible

-Hamas's mission is not only "river to sea" but also to kill every Jew and Israeli

-Statements about Jews being colonisers often do not take into account ancient origins (for which there is plenty of evidence) as well as the presence of numerous Jewish villages before Israel became a state. Many Jewish families have been a part of what we now call Israel for thousands of years. Judaism is one of the most ancient religions to exist, and that area has always been considered the homeland — making it a favourable location

I would also like to mention that since the elections in Gaza in 2005 or 2006 (I fail to remember off the top of my head), there has been no more voting. Once the Hamas was elected approximately 18 years ago, they became the sole possible governing power in Gaza. Hamas is also classified as a terrorist organisation by a considerable amount of countries, not all of which support Israel. That's really important to mention when discussing Palestinian liberation.

This is intended to be a civil ask. I simply wanted to offer some more information + another take on things. I would deeply appreciate a response

hi i'll do the best i can to answer these but i wont have all these answers and if anyone else has things to add on please do

I looked up the Peel Commission and according to Wikipedia it was a "British Royal Commission of Inquiry", which is the first red flag on the list for me. The Peel Commission occurred in 1936, before the Nakba, but it was part of Britain's colonial project in the region ("Mandatory Palestine" was around from 1920-1948). I find it hard to respect a British "commission of inquiry" when Palestinians were being subjected to colonization seeing as how it was between the colonial entity and the people it wanted to subjugate. Furthermore, the fact that it seems the Peel Commission introduced recommended a "partition plan." Partition is just a nicer word, in modern times as we know it, as segregation. The "separate but equal" slogan that is used to justify segregation has never, ever once worked or ever benefited anyone, least of all the people who are subjugated to the legalities and practices of segregation. And consider this as well:

According to Benny Morris, Ben-Gurion and Weizmann saw [the resoultion] "as a stepping stone to some further expansion and the eventual takeover of the whole of Palestine".

Anyway, I don't think one ruling from the 1930s during Britain's colonial subjugation of Palestine should be the defining judgement of a state solution and considering how much things have changed (have worsened for the Palestinians, and, yes, Israelis as well) they have time and time again said that a one state solution under a secular government under which all peoples are equal is the only real pathway to peace.

Hamas presented a new charter in 2017, citing the following:

The new document states the Islamist movement it is not seeking war with the Jewish people – only with Zionism that drives the occupation of Palestine.

@/bloglikeanegyptian illustrated the difference between the Hamas charter and recent statements from Israeli in government and military about Palestinians here, when they dehumanized the Palestinians entirely in order to justify the ongoing genocide happening now. Furthermore, despite what their propaganda would have you believe, Israel rejected peace with Hamas on 5 different occasion.

Not all countries designate Hamas as a terrorist organization (see the section titled 'Terrorist designation'). The designation of "terrorist" is purely a political one. An example I can give you is one from the United States: U.S. forces trained the Mujahideen - which would lead to the creation of the Taliban - in order to fight communist forces; they were initially designated "freedom fighters" when they were serving U.S. interests [see here].

(Also it should be noted that the ANC, IRA, and Algerian resistance forces were also designated as terrorists, to name a few.)

See Zachary Foster's thread on the history of Hamas with regards to how the Israeli state funded them and how they came to be the group they are today.

This is not me saying that those people should have been killed. This is not me saying that they deserved it. No one deserves that. But violence of Oct. 7th must be contextualized within the broader history of the colonization of Palestine, and the fact that Palestinians have been subjugated to that very violence for decades. Colonialism and apartheid are inherently violent. Colonialism and apartheid dehumanize, brutalize, demoralize, and ultimately murder those being colonized: i.e., in this case the Palestinians. As others have said: when you imprison a people in the world's largest concentration camp, when you strip them of their rights and humiliate them and brutalize them and make them second class citizens in their own country and don't allow them to leave and if they are they are not allowed to return - they are going to lash out. When they do nothing, they are murdered, brutalized, and imprisoned. When they protest peacefully - (see the March of Return) - they are assassinated and maimed by IOF soldiers who laugh as they murder children and the disabled. The Palestinian people have exhausted literally every other option; the Israeli state is ultimately responsible for their turn to violence as a means of liberation.

It is understood in post-apartheid South Africa that the innocent people who were killed should not have died - but that the violence committed by the oppressed is the fault of the apartheid state. Violence begets violence. What happened on Oct. 7th was blowback - it was inevitable, and the Israeli state knew that, and they didn't care (and they still don't care about the safety of Jewish people, they don't care about their citizens; it took them 2 days to retake towns in the south because they immediately started bombing Gaza - and in their bombing will murder their own citizens who they use as a means to commit genocide, but there are more recent posts about that elsewhere).

Under International Law, Palestinians have the right to armed struggle. The Israeli state is responsible for every single death; the Israeli state - as the colonial entity, as the occupying force, backed by other colonial giants such as the U.S. and Britan - is responsible for every single person killed, both Palestinian and Israeli.

One thing that people who talk about the 2 state solution never bring up is the West Bank. The West Bank is not under Hamas control; there is no Hamas. The West Bank is supposed to the "collaborative project" with the Israeli state - i.e., the 2 state solution in practice. The reality is that the 2 state solution is an abject failure. Why? Because even though legally land in the West Bank belongs to Palestinians, settlers come and illegally occupy it. Homes are either literally taken or bulldozed from Palestinians; the IOF protects these settlers, who have gotten away with killing and harassing Palestinians for years. (Read more about Israel being a settler colony here; I have a variety of resources to learn from regarding these subjects posted here). Settlers get away with - under the protection of the occupying force, therefore with the blessing of the state - illegally occupying Palestinian land.

There may have been a point where a 2 state solution was possible. But, at this point, unless the apartheid was completely reversed, Palestinian right to determination was not only recognized but enforced, etc., it can't happen. Not when the state has been slowly but surely encroaching on and stealing Palestinian land for years. The only pathway to peace - real pace - is a 1 state solution, detailed in Dispatches from Gaza:

MZ: Unlike what they’ve been told, we’ve never had a problem with Jews. Jews have been part of the fabric of our society way before the establishment of Israel. In fact, Jews escaping European persecution found refuge in Palestine. Gaza had a Jewish quarter. They were living peacefully, not with Arabs but as Arabs, right up until 1948. The establishment of Israel didn’t protect Jews; it caused the divide and danger. The solution is to roll back and dismantle the colony. My message to the colonizers who left their home countries to occupy our lands is simply to go back home. As for those who were born here, my message is: You are secondary victims of this colonial project. You are being used to occupy other people’s lands, and your Jewishness is being politicized for colonial means. Meditate carefully on the examples of South Africa, Angola, Algeria—they may not apply wholesale to the settler colonization of Palestine, but they hold lessons for you. Today you must make a choice: Either support this deadly colonial project, or side against it by supporting the liberation of Palestine and the establishment of a democratic state that liberates Palestinians, as well as Jews, from Zionism. A state that will honor the right of Palestinian refugees to return and compensation and that will welcome and protect its Jews as citizens of Palestine. This transition from Zionism to democracy will not cost anyone’s life; it will cost you your colonial privileges, and will free you—and us, its primary victims—from colonialism.

See above point in regards to Jewish people living in historic Palestine before the creation of the Israeli state.

I need to reiterate what others have said and make it very clear: the problem with the Israeli state is that it was publicly acknowledged as a colonial project and then marketed as an empty land for people to settle in. The problem is that there were already people there when both the British colonized Palestine and when the Zionist state was created. Palestinians - Muslim, Jewish, and Christian - were already there. The Zionist state was not. The formation of the state is built on the massacres and expulsions of Palestinians from their lands.

Regarding the election: you can read about it here. It shouldn't come as a surprise to learn that the United States meddled here, too. The summary is this, as I understand it: the United States wanted there to be an election; they backed Fatah, the secular party that was Hamas' opposition. Fatah repeatedly told the U.S. that they weren't ready for it but the U.S. ignored it and Hamas, having run on an anti-corruption campaign, won (by a small margin). Then the U.S. tried to pull a coup on Hamas, which was unsuccessful, after which Hamas took full power. (Again, see Zachary Foster's thread for the history of Hamas).

Again, as many others have said: a 1 state solution under a secular government under which all peoples are equal and are allowed to live freely both under the law and in practice. I'm compelled to quote Mohammed Zraiy again:

This transition from Zionism to democracy will not cost anyone’s life; it will cost you your colonial privileges, and will free you—and us, its primary victims—from colonialism.

+ I recommend visiting Decolonize Palestine where myths and propaganda is addressed.

[astarionspocketpussy]

OKAY so I'm thinking over Astarion again, big surprise, and I'm specifically overthinking the lie/half-truth(?) he tells you at the beginning of the game. Note: everything beyond this is entirely speculation. He tells you he's a Magistrate back at Baldur's Gate. This lie to us in the modern day is still kind of weird, but more understandable. Depending one where you live, there could upwards of 400 magistrates in a large city or metropolitan area, overseeing different districts or working in specific ways.

But that's the modern incarnation of a magistrate. Magistracy in earlier time periods was far more complex.

I can't pin down a specific historical inspiration for Baldur's Gate, though I've seen some say it's a bit like Renaissance Italy in some aspects. Architecturally I think that makes sense, but I cannot say for sure unless there's a game designer who's talked about this somewhere I haven't found. The Florence legal system is a whole other issue which I'm not gonna get into because I'm still making sense of all the specifics, but the point being that magistrates were probably less like the judges we have today. But the specific point I'm trying to make is about numbers.

There are only 125,000 people in Baldur's Gate in BG3, according to the Forgotten Realm's wiki at least (using 1492 as our date). That's a big city, for a setting in the late 1400s/early 1500s, but nowhere near what we would consider a big city today- at least for our purposes. Again, this varies by country. I'm painfully American, so I'm gonna make a lot of Americanisms, sorry. But that size means there's almost certainly a limited amount of Magistrates. I mean, there are only 541 federal magistrates for a country with a population 331 million people (the United States). Practically speaking, Baldur's Gate isn't going to have use for that many magistrates- their government is smaller, and they just won't have to deal with all that. There might be a few extra ones considering it's a mercantile city, but still.

Getting an exact number for Florencian magistrates/judges in the Renaissance was deceptively difficult, so I don't have one. But if we give a generous 15 per district, with 19 districts, that's still 285 magistrates for the whole city. (By districts, I'm referring to the one's listed on the Forgotten Realms Wiki- 4 in the upper city, 6 in the lower, 10 in the outer). And that's assuming- A) there's more than 1 magistrate per district, B) that every district has the same amount of magistrates, and C) that the outer city's districts are even treated as being different. That's a whole lot of assumptions. More likely the smaller districts only have 1 or 2 magistrates, and the larger ones likely don't have more than 5 or so, especially given the kind of judiciary Baldur's Gate seems to have. So, really, it's likely there is not that many people, and almost all of them would be connected to either nobility or wealthy mercantile families.

Which means if your character has any kind of understanding of those systems, or god forbid is a Baldurian themselves who's like, a noble or a merchant, at the very least it should strike them as odd that they aren't even a LITTLE familiar with his name. Like, we don't know who our local judges are now because they're usually just Some Guy, but that's less the case here. Now if he said 'barrister' or some other part of the judiciary that would have made sense. But a MAGISTRATE? Astarion is so lucky all of the companions are like. Amnesiacs or haven't been in Baldur's Gate in the last ten years because MY GOD was that a terrible lie.

[kinglyisms-archived]

The Cross Coven.

Current Patriarch: Wyatt Cross. Future Patriarch: None. Location: West side of Abarith, middle district, between the Vampries and the Humans.

THE CROSS FAMILY is the beginning of Abarith. The family has roots in the Royal Family, their blood though very distant connecting them all the way back to the founder of the Kingdom, Seiji Abarith. Their blood is what created the beginning of the first Coven in Abarith and the current reigning Witch Coven. They are the foundation in which the magical community stands on, their magic deeply rooted into the Lay Lines that run through Abarith. The more of them there are, the stronger the coven is. The more their ancestors are laid in Abarith's soul, the stronger their ancestrial magic is.

EVELYN CROSS was the previous Matriarch of the Cross Coven and the Head Witch on the 22nd King's court. She was the one who restored the reputation and stability of her coven by bringing together the Witches of Abarith. Uniting them under the family name. It was through her that the Witches truly began to gain back their strength and power, balancing themselves and the magic that runs through Abarith. To the Witches of Abarith, she was the greatest thing to ever come out of the Cross Family line.

THE BETRAYAL of Mirette Samaha sent the coven back centuries of work. Centuries of stabalizing and fixing the lay lines. Evelyn and her husband being slaughtered in their home, removing the future of the coven and ruining the family off set the entire magical network Abarith was founded on. The family scattered the Witches pissed off, that peaceful balance they found was ruined in a single night and the coven fractured apart. The magic, though still strong laid broken and tattered in the network, the witches left scrambling to pick up the pieces and wondering who would lead them.

WYATT CROSS after over a decade spent passed around, sold and resold, on the black market finally dragged himself from the trenches of the place like a burning blue flag. Loathing Vampires (mainly the Reids), Witches and people as a whole he was not their ideal Patriarch. However, being the only Cross left and a decent witch (and shitty Empath), as the son of Evelyn Cross, he was the legitimate and legal heir. This being the case, after much deliberation, arguing and debating from King Hiroki--he took the position.

CURRENTLY Wyatt is the Patriarch of what he considers a dead coven despite all the Witches in Abarith being a part of the coven. Their magic all tied into the network that runs through Abarith. He is a very angry, very unkind man, who wants to just see the entire world burn. The Witches magic that once ran strong and proudly through Abarith is now a fraction of what it used to be and not improving due to Wyatt's ignorant and hateful nature. The witches still fight with the Vampires over the death of Evelyn Cross and it's very much a sore spot for them whenever talked about. Evelyn was deeply beloved and they can tell that Wyatt is NOT his mother. Though they wish he would be.

THE CROSS FAMILY ESTATE still stands, the house cleaned up from what happend. Wyatt pays for it, though he never goes there. Wyatt lives above the Vampire District (which is above the Witches), on the side of the Mountain Abarith Castle was built on top of.

[cyberbenb]

Lack of medical treatment, problems with unit transfers are most common causes of appeals, new military ombudsman says

Twenty days into her new post as Ukraine’s new military rights commissioner, Olha Reshetylova said that she had already received 3,876 appeals.

In what she described as a preliminary assessment in a Facebook post about her first days on the job, Reshetylova said that lack of treatment and referrals to military medical commissions and problems moving between military units are the two leading causes for the appeals she received.  

More than 3,500 of the appeals have been relevant to her post and concern protecting the rights of soldiers. A portion of these concerning advice or clarification, which she referred to lawyers working “almost around the clock.”

“The rest of the appeals are substantive. Although each of them has its own individual problems, in general, of course, you can already see trends and separate blocks of problematic issues,” Reshetylova wrote.

While acknowledging that requests for medical treatment can be abused and that commanders face a “catastrophic” personnel shortage, she noted cases where commanders had denied referrals for treatment of injuries, urgent and planned operations, acute PTSD or panic attacks, and symptoms of severe concussions.

In one appeal that she cited, a serviceman with HIV voluntarily mobilized at the start of the war, but has since developed bleeding ulcers and faces worsening health effects. The soldier received a referral for surgery but was threatened with a desertion complaint if he left.

While Reshetylova said she is personally calling commanders in some cases to address the issues, “attention to the health of a serviceman should become a priority for both military doctors, unit commanders, and the entire system as a whole,” she said.

“It is not difficult to understand that in such a state the effectiveness of performing combat missions is low, and the mortality rate among servicemen due to diseases will grow. In addition, in the case of untreated mental disorder, a serviceman can pose a danger either to himself or to his comrades,” Reshetylova wrote.

Regarding military unit transfers, servicemembers were promised in November a more efficient way for transfering between units using the Army+ app. However, she wrote, “very often commanders do not carry out the transfer order or specifically transfer servicemen against their will to other positions, which complicates the execution of the order."

“Now we’re also solving these issues manually, where we have time. But it’s obvious that we need to look for a systemic solution,” Reshetylova wrote.

The third largest category of appeals comprised of questions from relatives of prisoners of war missing soldiers, according to Reshetylova.  

Ukraine’s Defense Ministry announced in April that it would create the new military ombudsman position to ensure soldiers had a way to report violations of their rights.

The ombudsman “will be responsible for considering appeals and complaints of service members, providing primary legal assistance, conducting inspections, and investigating violations of the rights of service members and their families,” the Defense Ministry said at the time.

Reshetylova previously co-founded and headed the Media Initiative for Human Rights, which has investigated war crimes related to the Russian war in Ukraine since 2016 and advocates for changes in government policies and social practices related to protecting human rights.

Ukraine denies transferring Air Force personnel to infantry amid troop shortages

The Ukrainian Air Force will transfer military personnel “en masse” to reinforce the Ground Forces’ combat brigades in early 2025, Ukrainska Pravda reported on Jan. 14, citing an undisclosed Air Force source.

The Kyiv IndependentKateryna Hodunova

[traffordparsons]

WAAM/Gaza

This artwork reimagines Roy Lichtenstein’s iconic pop art piece WHAAM! as a powerful commentary on the ongoing crisis in Gaza. The bold, comic-style explosion—a hallmark of Lichtenstein’s work—now bears the word GAZA, transforming the visual language of pop art into a searing political statement. The painting critiques the Israeli bombing campaigns in Gaza, calling them acts of genocide. By appropriating the familiar, almost sanitised aesthetics of war from Lichtenstein’s original, the work underscores the brutal reality behind the headlines: the indiscriminate killing of children, families, and aid workers. The explosion is littered with fragments of destroyed homes and human figures, representing the victims lost to the violence. This satirical piece uses the sharp contrast between pop art’s playful form and the somber message to confront viewers with the human cost of geopolitical conflict. It challenges the audience to question media narratives and the ethical responsibilities of global powers, making it both a tribute to Lichtenstein’s artistic legacy and a defiant cry against oppression and injustice. Labelling Israel’s actions as genocide is not hyperbolic—it is a reflection of the lived reality for Palestinians in Gaza. The systematic destruction of life, infrastructure, and culture cannot be dismissed as "collateral damage." The targeted killings of children, the dehumanization of an entire population, and the deliberate creation of conditions that make life unlivable are acts of genocide as defined by international law. While Israel claims its actions are defensive measures against Hamas, the scale and scope of the destruction go far beyond military necessity. The collective punishment of over two million people, half of whom are children, cannot be justified as self-defense. The argument that civilian deaths are "unintended" rings hollow when hospitals, refugee camps, and UN shelters are repeatedly bombed. The actions of Israel in Gaza, including mass killings of civilians, destruction of infrastructure, and forced displacement, align with the legal and moral definitions of genocide. The 1948 United Nations Genocide Convention defines genocide as acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. By examining the systematic and deliberate nature of these actions, it becomes clear why many have labeled them as genocide, particularly when considering the disproportionate impact on children, families, and essential community structures in Gaza. The staggering number of Palestinian deaths, including thousands of children, is a defining characteristic of genocide. Israeli airstrikes and military operations in densely populated areas have repeatedly resulted in disproportionate civilian casualties. Hospitals, schools, and shelters, supposedly protected under international law, have been targeted. Israel has systematically destroyed homes, medical facilities, and essential infrastructure, creating un -livable conditions for Gazans. These deliberate acts align with the genocidal act of "deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction." The siege, cutting off water, food, and medical supplies, exacerbates this condition. The death toll of Palestinian children is staggering, with numbers reaching into the thousands. Killing children, whether through direct targeting or willful negligence of civilian protections, points to an intent to annihilate future generations of Palestinians. Statements by Israeli officials have dehumanised Palestinians, referring to them as "human animals" or "terrorists" en masse. This rhetoric serves to justify the systematic killing and erasure of a people, mirroring language historically used in genocides worldwide. Forcing over a million Palestinians to evacuate northern Gaza under threat of annihilation constitutes a forced population transfer, a hallmark of genocide. This displacement compounds decades of occupation, siege, and oppression, which have collectively aimed to erase the Palestinian presence from the region. United Nations Experts In October 2023, UN-appointed experts explicitly warned that Israel's actions in Gaza could amount to genocide. Their findings emphasised the combination of siege tactics, indiscriminate bombing, and mass civilian casualties. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have meticulously documented Israel's violations of international law. Legal scholars within these organizations have described these actions as genocidal, pointing to the systemic nature of the violence Professors of international law, such as Francis Boyle, argue that Israel's policies toward Palestinians fulfill the criteria of genocide. From forced displacement to systematic killings, the evidence aligns with the legal definition. These voices highlight the complicity of Western powers in enabling and supporting these crimes.

[quantumresidency]

EB-5 Visa India: Fast-Track Your U.S. Green Card with an Investment

What is the EB-5 Visa?

The EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program allows foreign nationals to gain permanent residency (green card) in the United States by investing in U.S. businesses. The minimum required investment must create at least 10 full-time jobs for U.S. workers. This visa has become an attractive choice for Indian investors due to its simplicity and family benefits.

Why is the EB-5 Visa Popular Among Indian Investors?

Several factors make the EB-5 visa appealing to Indians:

Direct pathway to U.S. Green Card without the need for sponsorship or lottery.

Fewer restrictions on travel, education, and employment after gaining residency.

Includes family members (spouse and children under 21).

Opportunities for children to attend U.S. universities with lower tuition rates for residents.

Benefits of the EB-5 Visa for Indian Families

Education: Your children can study in the U.S. with the same benefits as local residents.

Employment Opportunities: You and your spouse can work or start businesses freely in the U.S.

Travel Flexibility: Travel without visa restrictions and enjoy easy access to global destinations.

U.S. Citizenship Path: You can apply for U.S. citizenship after holding a green card for 5 years.

Challenges to Consider

Though the EB-5 visa offers many advantages, Indian investors should be aware of some challenges:

Lengthy processing times due to high demand.

Careful due diligence required when selecting projects to avoid risks.

Currency exchange rate fluctuations may affect investment plans.

Case Study: Indian Family’s Journey with EB-5 Visa

The Patel Family from Mumbai wanted better educational opportunities for their children. They invested $800,000 in a regional center project located in a Targeted Employment Area. After receiving their conditional green card, the family moved to California. Two years later, they successfully removed the conditions on their green cards and are now U.S. residents, enjoying the benefits of American education and lifestyle.

Key Takeaways

The EB-5 visa offers a fast-track path to U.S. residency through investment.

Indian investors need to meet the $800,000 or $1,050,000 investment requirement.

It provides green card benefits for the whole family, including children under 21.

Careful project selection and legal guidance are essential for success.

Conclusion

The EB-5 visa is a powerful opportunity for Indian investors seeking a fast and reliable pathway to U.S. residency. With the ability to secure a green card for your entire family and access excellent educational and professional opportunities, the EB-5 visa can open the door to a brighter future. Ensure you work with experienced immigration advisors to make informed decisions and successfully navigate the process.

Fast-track your journey to the U.S. today with the EB-5 Visa and unlock a world of new possibilities!

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Andrew Prokop at Vox:

Seven days after being sworn in as president, Donald Trump threw the nation into crisis. The country had wondered whether the new president would follow through on the extreme and authoritarian proposals he’d put forward in his campaign. On January 27, 2017, by executive order, Trump imposed an extreme version of his “Muslim ban” — barring people from seven mostly-Muslim countries from entering the United States.  Even people already approved as lawful permanent residents — people with green cards, who had been legally living and working in the US, often for years — could all of a sudden be turned away, refused entry to their adopted home. 

Chaos unfolded at airports, nationwide protests erupted, and to many, it felt like something new and genuinely frightening was taking place: a slide into an oppressive regime. But then the crisis ebbed. Just two days after the ban was imposed, widespread criticism pushed the administration to water down the policy — “clarifying” green card holders were exempt. Five days after that, a judge blocked the rest of the order from going into effect. The guardrails protecting democracy had, it seemed, held. This pattern recurred during Trump’s presidency. The president ordered or considered something outrageous. He faced pushback in response. And he usually, ultimately, ended up constrained. Sometimes Trump would eventually end up with a scaled-back version of what he wanted: a retooled travel ban, made less blatantly discriminatory, did eventually get court approval. Sometimes he’d manage to go quite far — as in his attempt to steal the 2020 election — before being thwarted. But often he’d fail entirely.

All this has led to a sort of complacency among many Americans about what a second Trump term would bring. There’s a mentality of: “It won’t be that bad — we got through it last time, right?” We did get through it last time. But that wasn’t for lack of Trump’s trying. It was because of the guardrails: those features of the political system, both formal and informal, that so often prevented Trump from actually doing the undemocratic things he tried to do. So to assess the peril a second Trump term poses for American democracy, we need to assess the condition of the guardrails. Worryingly, most of them have weakened since Trump first came to power; some have weakened very significantly. None appear to have gotten stronger.  We’re still a very long way from a system where the president can truly rule without any checks on his power. We can’t know right now exactly how often the guardrails would still hold Trump back, or how future crises would play out.

The guardrails: What they are

To understand what exactly the guardrails protecting American democracy are, think about how Trump’s corrupt ambitions were so often frustrated during his first term. When he fired FBI Director James Comey, he ended up with special counsel Robert Mueller. When he wanted Mueller fired, it didn’t happen. When Trump urged prosecutors to charge his political enemies, they largely didn’t. He tried to punish CNN for negative coverage by blocking their parent company’s sale to AT&T; the sale went through. He tried to get Ukraine’s president to dig up dirt on the Biden family, but that effort blew up in his face and got him impeached.  He never went through with other things he mused about — like delaying the 2020 election due to the pandemic or using the military to crack down on racial justice unrest. And though his attempt to overturn Biden’s election win went further than almost anyone expected, it ultimately failed too.

In all these instances, there was pushback from part of the political system — often multiple parts — that either convinced or impelled Trump to back down.  We can think of the forces constraining Trump in two categories. First, there are all the other government officials, among whom power in the system is dispersed. These include:

Executive branch appointees, many of whom often refused to carry out Trump’s orders even though Trump himself appointed them

The career civil service — the permanent government employees who can’t be fired

Members of Congress, who pass or block laws, confirm nominees, and raise a stink when the administration does something they don’t like

The courts, charged with enforcing the law, who often ruled against Trump

State and local officials, such as the election administrators who certified Biden’s swing state wins in 2020 

Second, there are the informal constraints. These include:

The Republican Party, which, broadly defined, includes politicians, party officials, and interest groups Trump wants to keep on his side

The press, which can unearth damaging news and hammer a president with critical coverage

The public, who, when roused, can speak out, take to the streets, or vote politicians out of office

To be truly successful, a would-be authoritarian would need to coopt, weaken, or smash many of these rival power centers. 

Vox’s Andrew Prokop examines how the guardrails of democracy have held up since Donald Trump took office. The guardrails mostly kept Trump in check from his most blatantly authoritarian impulses during his term, but they have significantly weakened over his reign and afterwards.

If Trump comes back in again, all the remaining guardrails to his fascist rule will all but melt away.

Read the full story at Vox.

[odinsblog]

Excerpts:

Arguably the worst example of bias is the Times’s directive that its reports should “avoid” using the phrase “occupied territory” when describing Palestinian land. I’ve closely monitored the paper’s slanted coverage for more than a decade, and I admit to being stunned by this. Let’s set aside Gaza for the moment, even though international legal experts explain that Israel’s air, sea, and land blockade constituted “occupation” even before October 7.

But what about West Bank Palestine? How can the Times pretend that Israel’s permanent military forces, there since June 1967, do not constitute an “occupation?” Israel’s military and police checkpoints and the fact that Israel’s military law is supreme — what is this if not an “occupation?”

Just as offensive is the internal Times memo’s instruction that reporters should not use the word Palestine “except in very rare cases.” This is another jaw dropper. Several million people call themselves “Palestinians,” and Palestine is represented at the United Nations. The United States claims that it still favors a two-state solution; how can you describe the second state without saying “Palestine?”

The Times also told its staff not to use the expression “refugee camps” to describe certain areas in Gaza. The paper justifies this linguistic censorship by arguing, “While termed refugee camps, the refugee centers in Gaza are developed and densely populated neighborhoods dating to the 1948 war.” In short, the paper says, before October 7 Gazans were no longer living in tent cities — (as they are again in Rafah and elsewhere in the territory since Israel destroyed entire neighborhoods) — so you can’t say “camps.” But this isn’t the point. Palestinians in both Gaza and the West Bank do consider themselves refugees; many families still have the keys to the homes they or their ancestors were forced from in 1948. An honest newspaper would report this once in a while instead of shutting down discussion by dictating vocabulary.

This bombshell from The Intercept comes after months of growing criticism of the New York Times over its coverage of Gaza and Palestine more broadly. One New York Times reporter has been removed from the paper after her anti-Palestinian bias came to light after she played a role in one of the paper’s most glaring reporting scandals since October 7. The Times coverage from Gaza has been astonishingly dishonest, going so far as to blame Palestinian aid seekers for their own deaths when attacked by Israeli forces. This malpractice hasn’t been isolated to Gaza, as the paper has failed in its reporting of the West Bank, too.

The Intercept revelations are extraordinarily valuable. But some U.S. mainstream bias is so comprehensive and has gone on for so long that it is still passing unnoticed. Let’s take the fact that the 670,000 Jewish Israelis who have moved permanently into occupied West Bank Palestine since 1967 are universally called “settlers,” instead of “colonists,” and the places where they now live are called “settlements.” The Times memo didn’t even have to order this usage; it just happens automatically.

Whoever first chose the word “settlers” back in the 1970s deserves a gold medal for dishonest euphemism. “Settlers” gives the impression of hardy pioneers who are entering a land that is nearly empty, a more up-to-date version of the original Zionist expression: “a people without land for a land without people.” The truth is, of course, different; West Bank Palestine is characterized by Israeli military checkpoints, segregated roads for Jews only — and, in recent months, murderous pogroms carried out by settlers/colonists with the complicity of the Israeli army. You regularly read accounts by people who say that a single visit to the occupied West Bank was so shocking that they had to revise their previous views.

George Orwell did not only explain that dishonest and euphemistic language can hide important truths. He went further — arguing convincingly that what he called “Newspeak” could actually prevent you from even thinking accurately. Just imagine how American opinions about Israel/Palestine would start changing if the Israeli “colonists” were named accurately, even just part of the time.

A secret internal ‘NYTimes’ memo reveals the paper’s anti-Palestinian bias is even worse than we thought

The shocking revelation of the New York Times's offensive internal style guide on language it will not permit in its Palestine reporting should prompt a broad examination of the paper's longtime bias.

[link]

Kudos to the anonymous New York Times staffers who leaked the paper’s offensive internal guide about the language it won’t permit in its reports on Israel/Palestine, and more kudos to The Intercept for publishing it. The shocking revelation should prompt an even broader examination of the biased language that has long been routine in the Times and across all U.S. media.